Piltdown Superman

We frequently see the fallacy of reification , where something abstract is given traits belonging to a person or entity. This sort of thing is done frequently and often for humorous purposes, like when Basement Cat gives me an evil look. No, she can't do that. Or saying that the beach is calling for me. No, ain't happening, sorry. Science says...no, it doesn't, but maybe some scientists say. See? Figures of speech using reification abound in stories and casual talk, but when used in an argument or scientific paper, reification is a fallacy. Proponents of scum-to-skeptic evolution are using the fallacy more and more frequently, indicating that evolution chooses, selects, decides, and so on. It's not infrequent to see an evolutionist making evolution into a puny god.  Pantheon of gods in  The Triumph of Civilization by Jacques Réattu, 1793 Evolution has always been a religious idea from way back, including Greek and Hindu religions. What we have now is mo

It's time for a post that's really down to earth. For the most part, we put plants in soil, whether on farms, in gardens, potted plants in the home, and so on. Most folks know that plants need soil so they can grow, but we forget that it's little things in life that matter. Or, little living things. Microbes. There's a great deal of life underfoot. Credit: Freeimages /  Dieter Joel Jagnow People tend to get all het up about bacteria, thinking that it makes people sick. Fact is, there are many bacteria that are beneficial to us. They live in us, and in the soil as well, which is good for the plants. Bacteria in dirt has its own communities, like so many other living things. They adjust to environmental conditions and often work together. There is a symbiosis with bacteria, other living things, and the environment that defies Darwinism and shows the ingenuity of the Creator. I remember making mud pies as a child for my mom—she didn’t like them too much.1 Pie maki

For molecules-to-misotheist evolution to work, it needs huge amounts of time. Secularists ignore evidence that shows the earth is young, and make excuses for tremendous flaws in radiometric dating (see " Would Evidence for Radiometric Dating Stand Up in a Court of Law? " for more on the subject, including several links). I reckon they must feel that bad science is better than admitting that evidence fails to produce an old earth, so they keep on with radiometric dating. Assembled with graphics from Openclipart More specifically, radio carbon dating deals with organic matter and the amount of carbon contained therein. Carbon-14 should not be found in certain items after 57,000 Darwin years, so certain things that have been dated at millions of years should not contain any carbon. But they do. Sure, evolutionists circle the wagons to protect their prize pig, making excuses such as "contamination". Such excuses do not withstand scrutiny and change the fact that

Seems like the hands at the Darwin Ranch would get discouraged and find more rewarding (as well as useful) employment, what with all the bad news that's been carted in lately. They're unable to let bad evolutionary stories alone because new findings get publicity mighty quick like, and those of us with a creationary persuasion won't let them get away with it. Especially those of us with unregistered assault keyboards. Largest sea sponge found, "about the size of a minivan" Credit: NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research , 2015 Hohonu Moana Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents Time to commence rewriting the textbooks and adjusting the evolutionary timelines again, since the new fossils are recalcitrant and quite a bit out of sequence according to evolutionary mythology. Colony of sea sponges was found and given an evolutionary date after  an "extinction event", but it had thrived  Uncooperative fish showed up in the fossil rec

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Every once in a while, Christians are accosted by unbelievers who demand "proof" (or evidence) of the miracles that Bible believers affirm. On this site, as well as on many of those which are linked, a reader will find copious evidence demonstrating the paucity of particles-to-pastor evolution, and presenting scientific evidence affirming biblical creation. What about the events that happened about 4,000 years after creation that involve Jesus? Background image: Pixabay /   Gerd Altmann Before I commence to telling about evidence for Jesus, I need to lead y'all on a side trail for a few moments. Whether discussing creation, evolution, the life of Jesus, or other things that we are unable to observe in the here and now, we are using historical science — a useful term that is not exclusive to creationists [ 1 ]. Historical science attempts to use data in the present in an effort to determine past events, while operational science is what is

A new entry for the "What is  That?"  file is a strange creature with the Latin name  Saccorhytus coronarius . Ugly thing, but it probably didn't know it or care, what with being exceptionally tiny and all. For that matter, it didn't seem good for anything except eating, since it was mostly mouth. The disgusting part (well, to me) is that it had no anus, so it would excrete from the same place that it ate. Reminds me of certain anti-creationists, but never mind about that now. Saccorhytus coronarius credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Apokryltaros  ( CC BY-SA 4.0 ) Mighty fine work for the palenotologists go commence to studying the thing and finding all sorts of details. Saccy had various bumps and things, and some spikes. Evolutionists are thinking that this may have had the precursors to gills. Fish evolved from it, and we evolved from fish according to their mythology. Further, since it showed up in Cambrian rock, evolutionary scientists are also saying that there

Outer space is a big place. But you are bright people and knew that already. Science fiction aficionados have produced many stories that involve going faster than light, but Uncle Albert Einstein spoiled that idea. Some wrote stories and just ignored the problem (similar to the way some evolutionists ignore inconvenient fossils ), moving at many times the speed of light. When the universe got bigger (well, better measurements and such), moving at such speeds would still take a mighty long time to reach other stars. So, they lassoed the concept of warp drive. Credit:  NASA/ESA (modified), usage does not imply endorsement of site contents W arp drive has several names (including subspace ), and did not originate with Star Trek, but Mr. Roddenberry's humanistic programs sure did make it popular. Naturally, fans will attempt to explain such things in their favorite shows and make them seem somewhat realistic, but they can only do so much with a concept that is extremely spec